On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: >> On 2015-04-01 13:29:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> WHEN won't help; if there are any INSTEAD OF triggers, no insert will >>> happen, whether the triggers actually fire or not. > >> Well, right now it doesn't work at all. It seems pretty reasonable to >> define things so that the insert happens normally if there's no matching >> INSTEAD OF trigger. > > It would absolutely *not* be reasonable for WHEN conditions for triggers > on tables to work completely differently than they do for triggers on > views. That ship's sailed.
Clue me in, because I'm confused. If no trigger fires, we do whatever an object of that type would normally do in the absence of any trigger, no? For a view, that's error out; for a table, that's perform the action on the underlying data. That doesn't seem terribly unprincipled. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
